Me too: in fact I got a kit just the other day with the very same intention! I was hoping to find a GWS float set to make it all easy, but no luck so far. The biggest challenge will be keeping the tip floats secure, I think!

I'm a great admirer of these little planes, having just done the Corsair with a small brushless motor.

Mike, as I've started examining the kit in detail, I see that the incidence angle of the wing, at its root, is about 2 degrees relative to the axis of the fuselage, while the horizontal stabilizer and elevator is parallel to the fuselage axis.

Have you noticed the same in the Corsair? If so, how did you orient the motor with regard to down-thrust? Did you reduce the incidence angle in the wing saddle?

This is why I plan to assemble the and fly plane in a relatively unmodified condition, changing only the ailerons to a more scale profile, to allow for later addition of split flaps. I can counteract any tendency for the aircraft to "balloon" under power using a programmed mixing but, I want to see how pronounced the effect is... and will ponder the effect adding the floats will induce.

David, having cut my teeth on the GWS kits, the Zero was designed for brushed/nicads and as such the designers put in a fair bit of wing incidence. There are some long threads around about it, but all of us who went brushless took out the + incidence, either by shimming down the LE, or sanding the wing saddle to raise the TE. Very difficult to get it trimmed for power changes without adjusting it.

Jeff,
You confirm what my "spidey-sense" was telling me. I suspect I will go the LE shim route, cutting away the wing fillet for now... building it back up later, when she's trimmed out.
With thanks and best complements,
David

I didn't change the Corsair at all, and added (then subsequently removed) some downthrust on my little 2812 motor. I like the way it flies and have had a lot of fun with it. I left the rudder fixed and really do not think that adding flaps is worthwhile on a model this small: I mean I know it is possible, but just don't think it adds anything except realism. But that's as good a reason as any I suppose!

I think the Rufe will need rudder (or maybe just a water rudder) to handle take-offs. I'll be very interested to see how you get on.

I would omit the flaps. Flaps increase lift at low speed, yes, but another function of flaps is to be able to be able to make a steeper approach. Exactly what you don't want when water flying. Leave out the flap servo and associated linkages, and you will be a bit lighter, which is the best flap of all. I agree with Mike that a rudder will be essential with this model. I think this is a great project, by the way!

"The biggest challenge will be keeping the tip floats secure, I think!"

No. The biggest challenge is trying to get both tip floats out of the water before one of them pinwheels the plane. Been there, done that. And you don't really want the floats too secure, you would like them to break free in a botched landing.

I was thinking about the "tip float dig" issue last night. The scale floats have a "vee" cross section to reduce slapping. But I dont have a pilot to worry about. So, I'm thinking of flattening the bottom of the tip floats , leaving a scale side view and perhaps using painting to imply the scale shape from a distance... slightly shortening the strut length to allow more roll allowance... Perhaps even adding some transparent chines to the main float so it doesn't dig in so much.

i surmised my problem with take off being I didn't glass the float, It was just painted and created too much friction, I might try to shoot it with some satin clear I have, but truth be told after burning up two ESCs playing with it I lost interest